mediumMultiple Choice
300-410 Practice Question: Runs the following command on Router R1: R1# show…
A network engineer runs the following command on Router R1:
R1# show ip policy Interface Route-map
GigabitEthernet0/0 PBR-TEST
R1# show route-map PBR-TEST
route-map PBR-TEST, permit, sequence 10 Match clauses:
ip address (access-lists): 110
Set clauses:
ip next-hop 192.168.100.1
Policy routing matches: 0 packets, 0 bytes
R1# show access-lists 110
Extended IP access list 110
10 permit tcp 10.0.0.0 0.255.255.255 any eq 80
20 permit tcp 10.0.0.0 0.255.255.255 any eq 443
R1# show ip route 192.168.100.1Routing entry for 192.168.100.1/32 Known via "ospf 1", distance 110, metric 20 Last update from 10.1.1.2 on GigabitEthernet0/1
Based on this output, what is the most likely reason for zero policy routing matches?
⚠ Common exam trap
The trap is assuming the next-hop is unreachable because of the zero matches, but the routing table shows it is reachable — candidates must focus on the match criteria and interface traffic.
Answer choices
Why each option matters
Answer the question above first, then reveal the full breakdown to understand why each option is right or wrong.
Correct answer & explanation
✓
The access list 110 is not matching any traffic arriving on GigabitEthernet0/0.
The output shows that the route map PBR-TEST is applied to GigabitEthernet0/0 and matches access list 110, but zero packets have matched. The most likely reason is that no traffic arriving on GigabitEthernet0/0 matches the access list criteria (TCP ports 80 or 443 from 10.0.0.0/8). The next-hop is reachable via OSPF, so that is not the issue. The route map sequence and application are correct.
Answer analysis
Option-by-option breakdown
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
- ✗
The next-hop 192.168.100.1 is not reachable.
Why it's wrong here
The routing table shows 192.168.100.1/32 reachable via OSPF through 10.1.1.2, so next-hop reachability is satisfied. This would be the cause if the next-hop were absent from the RIB, but the output confirms it is present.
- ✓
The access list 110 is not matching any traffic arriving on GigabitEthernet0/0.
Why this is correct
Zero matches occur because access list 110 permits only TCP ports 80 and 443 from 10.0.0.0/8; if hosts on GigabitEthernet0/0 send other protocols or ports, no packets satisfy the match clause, so the route-map never triggers.
- ✗
The route map sequence number is too high.
Why it's wrong here
Sequence numbers order entries within a route map; sequence 10 is evaluated first and is valid. A high sequence number would only matter if an earlier deny or match entry pre-empted it, which the output does not show.
- ✗
The route map needs to be applied globally.
Why it's wrong here
PBR route maps attach to interfaces via ip policy, and show ip policy confirms PBR-TEST is already bound to GigabitEthernet0/0. Global application is not how PBR operates; interface-level attachment is the correct mechanism and is already in place.
Visual reference
Quick reference
Routing Protocol Comparison
| Protocol | Metric | Max Hops | Algorithm | Type |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RIP v2 | Hop count | 15 | Bellman-Ford | Distance vector |
| OSPF | Cost (bandwidth) | Unlimited | Dijkstra (SPF) | Link state |
| EIGRP | Composite metric | Unlimited | DUAL | Hybrid |
| IS-IS | Cost | Unlimited | Dijkstra | Link state |
| BGP | Policy / attributes | Unlimited | Path vector | Path vector |
RIP's 15-hop limit makes it unsuitable for large networks. OSPF and EIGRP dominate modern enterprise deployments.
Go deeper
Related to this question
About these practice questions
One of 1,401 original 300-410 practice questions on Courseiva, each with a full explanation and wrong-answer analysis — not exam dumps or protected exam content. Learn why practice questions differ from exam dumps →
Same concept, more angles
3 more ways this is tested on 300-410
These questions test the same concept from different angles. Work through them to make sure you can recognise it however the exam phrases it.
Variation 1. A network engineer is troubleshooting PBR on a Cisco router where traffic from subnet 10.1.1.0/24 should be forwarded to next-hop 192.168.1.2. The route map 'PBR-10' is configured with 'match ip address 150' and 'set ip next-hop 192.168.1.2'. The engineer applies the route map to interface GigabitEthernet0/0. The engineer notices that PBR is not working, and the router is using the routing table to forward traffic. The engineer checks the ACL 150 and confirms it matches 10.1.1.0/24. The engineer also checks the interface configuration and sees 'ip policy route-map PBR-10' applied. What is the most likely cause?
medium- ✓ A.The ACL 150 does not exist or is misconfigured, causing the route map to not match any traffic.
- B.The 'set ip next-hop' command is misspelled as 'set ip nexthop'.
- C.The router is running an older IOS version that does not support PBR.
- D.The 'ip policy route-map' command is applied to the outgoing interface instead of the incoming interface.
Why A: If PBR is not working and the router uses the routing table, it could be because the route map is not being processed due to a missing 'match' statement or the route map being empty. However, a common cause is that the route map has a 'match ip address' that references an ACL that does not exist or is misconfigured. The engineer should verify that the ACL 150 exists and is correctly configured.
Variation 2. A network engineer runs the following command on Router R1: R1# show ip policy Interface Route-map GigabitEthernet0/0 PBR-DEFAULT R1# show route-map PBR-DEFAULT route-map PBR-DEFAULT, permit, sequence 10 Match clauses: ip address (access-lists): 150 Set clauses: ip next-hop 10.0.0.2 Policy routing matches: 0 packets, 0 bytes route-map PBR-DEFAULT, deny, sequence 20 Match clauses: Set clauses: Policy routing matches: 0 packets, 0 bytes R1# show access-lists 150 Extended IP access list 150 10 permit ip 192.168.1.0 0.0.0.255 any R1# show ip route 10.0.0.2 Routing entry for 10.0.0.2/32 Known via "ospf 1", distance 110, metric 20 Last update from 10.1.1.2 on GigabitEthernet0/1 Based on this output, what is the most likely problem?
medium- A.The deny sequence 20 is blocking all traffic from being policy-routed.
- ✓ B.No traffic matching ACL 150 is arriving on GigabitEthernet0/0.
- C.The next-hop 10.0.0.2 is unreachable.
- D.The route map is missing a permit statement.
Why B: The most likely problem is that no traffic matching ACL 150 is arriving on GigabitEthernet0/0. The route map PBR-DEFAULT has a match clause for ACL 150, but the policy routing matches count is 0 packets, indicating that no packets have matched the ACL. Since the ACL permits traffic from 192.168.1.0/24, it suggests that no such traffic is being received on the interface.
Variation 3. A network engineer runs the following command on Router R1: R1# show route-map route-map PBR-ROUTE, permit, sequence 10 Match clauses: ip address (access-lists): ACL-PBR Set clauses: ip next-hop 192.168.1.2 Policy routing matches: 0 packets, 0 bytes route-map PBR-ROUTE, permit, sequence 20 Match clauses: Set clauses: ip next-hop 192.168.2.2 Policy routing matches: 0 packets, 0 bytes R1# show ip policy Interface Route-map GigabitEthernet0/0 PBR-ROUTE Based on this output, what is the most likely problem?
medium- A.The route map is not applied to an interface.
- ✓ B.The access list ACL-PBR does not exist or matches no traffic.
- C.The next-hop 192.168.1.2 is unreachable.
- D.The route map is missing a permit statement.
Why B: The show route-map output shows zero policy routing matches. The route map is applied to the interface, but the access list ACL-PBR may not match any traffic, or traffic is not arriving on GigabitEthernet0/0. The set clause in sequence 20 is applied unconditionally (no match clause), which would normally match all traffic, but sequence 10 must be evaluated first; if ACL-PBR matches nothing, sequence 20 would match all, yet counters still show zero, indicating no traffic is being policy-routed at all.
JA
Written and reviewed by Johnson Ajibi, MSc IT Security
Senior Network & Security Engineer · founder of Courseiva
Last reviewed September 2026 · checked against the official Cisco exam blueprint
This 300-410 practice question is part of Courseiva's free Cisco certification practice question bank. Courseiva provides original exam-style practice questions with explanations, topic-based practice, mock exams, readiness tracking, and study analytics to help learners prepare for the 300-410 exam.